rigmort:My wife is an underwriting manager. She said that yes, they won't be able to turn you down or rider out for a previous condition or other reason.... but there's nothing that says they can't charge whatever they want. They are now being forced to "insure" against future problems AND current ones. Do you really think they won't cover their own asses?

PREMIUMS WILL GO UPBIGTIME FOR EVERYONE.

If they do that, they'll run afoul of the rate review and medical-loss ratio rules.

Phinn:Serious Black: The free market has already said that sick people can't be covered because there is no way to make voluntary coverage for them actuarially sound.

Which free market was that?

The one that has us paying a lot more to insure 65% of our population than the citizens of 35 nations with higher rated healthcare pay to insure their entire populations. That "free market".The "invisible hand" that seems to spend most of it's time stroking billionaire's dicks.

I don't see what the problem is. Everyone just needs to start businesses, drill for oil, abuse loopholes and tax shelters, hire overseas and put your money in the Cayman Islands. That will save you from any additional taxes. Every American can do that, right?

Waldo Pepper - so what if you are healthy and simply pay for whatever doctor visits you need at the time you are penalized by the government for not buy a product/service?

What f you simply pay for car repairs and medical bills out of your own pocket when you cause accident? You are penalized by the government for not buying a product/service?

It's the same principle. You're required to carry liability auto insurance if you drive because the risk to others is too great if you don't. We can't police everyone and make sure they have sufficient means and willingness to pay, so we simply require that they carry liability insurance so that if they cause an accident, the other person won't be left high and dry.

In this case, what if you, young and reasonably healthy though you may be, are suddenly diagnosed with Hodgkins disease? What if you break your neck snowboarding and can no longer work?

Making sure that everyone contributes spreads the cost across a larger pool and helps solve the free rider problem of people who gamble on not carrying insurance and then cause society to bear the cost when their decision goes sideways.

/the conservatives here at work are LOSING. THEIR. SH*T.//I'm just reminding them it's constitutional. Just like when the Militia Acts instructed people to buy weapons, bags, and coats. And turn up on a regular basis for inspection. And that was George Washington that signed that law.///today is a fun day!

Bloody William:To all the whiny conservatives talking about how this is THE TAX INCREASE OBAMA PROMISED HE'D NEVER DO!!!, I have to ask you...

Do you understand that generally liberals and Democrats don't see taxes as fundamentally the worst possible thing ever? That, of all the promises that could be broken, this one broken in this way really isn't that troubling? That we understand we're part of a society, and that we'll get a greater benefit through the effects of the law and the mandate than we would through NO TAXES AGAIN EVER? That we don't worship Grover Norquist, and that we realize that there are more important things out there, like public health and health insurance and health care reform to improve the massive privatized sinkhole it has become in the last few decades?

Seems sorta like being scandalized that a stripper took her top off. I guess Conservatives would prefer that the uninsured be paid for people responsible enough to have insurance or pay for their health care instead of sharing this responsibility at a social level. The fairest option is taxes, alternately you can let people bleed to death in the emergency rooms.

Serious Black:rigmort: My wife is an underwriting manager. She said that yes, they won't be able to turn you down or rider out for a previous condition or other reason.... but there's nothing that says they can't charge whatever they want. They are now being forced to "insure" against future problems AND current ones. Do you really think they won't cover their own asses?

PREMIUMS WILL GO UPBIGTIME FOR EVERYONE.

If they do that, they'll run afoul of the rate review and medical-loss ratio rules.

letthepossumlive:Will this lead to clinics to open in places like Walmart so people can come in and ask about a rash or something? At least they know they will get paid now. I like the reform but have doubts about the amount of fraud that will will happen.

First things first I guess.

Frankly, that should have been done a long time ago. Maybe not directly inside the store like with the optometrists and korean hair and nail salon places reeking of chemicals.............. but somewhere set off, like the tire and checkup section.

I'd like to welcome my American friends to the ranks of other developed countries. Seriously, the first time you need to go to the emergency room, you'll see what the rest of us have been talking about.

draa:wraithmare: I love that Freeper posts calling for blood to be spilled and open revolution are being pulled by moderators. Why does the Free Republic hate the First Amendment?!?! WHAR MY RIGHTS??? WHAR???

They missed one.

FreeRepublic:America Crosses The RubiconThursday, June 28, 2012 11:05:27 AM · by Wuli · 1 repliesJune 28, 2012 | WuliIn American history, June 28, 2012 is a day that will go down in infamy. The nation may have just crossed the Rubicon between the Liberty for which it was founded and social and political hell. Only the most massive citizen uprising since the revolution can set the record straight. Quit complaining, quit sitting on the sidelines watching and get working in any and every way you can. It's no longer up to the little dictators in judges robes, it's up to us.

Y'know, this is gonna be like when Moses came down from Mt. Sinai with the Ten Commandments on the Freepers.

As a Canadian, I'm very happy with this result. Tech companies were already preferring to start up in Canada because the health care is taxpayer-funded.

Nothing has changed. In fact, more companies may prefer to outsource studios to Que? Nada because of the pressure to enroll employees in company healthcare in USA and the embarrassment if that's not an option.

That's just something to think about. That said, this is baby steps, and for the good of everyone, I really do hope this is one step towards a single payer system. You guys are baby stepping to letting teh gays get married, baby stepping to this too. It's a good thing.

Congratulations United States. You might actually be growing up and joining the rest of the world by recognizing that universal health care actually costs less in the long run then "for profit" care. Yeah, I know you don't believe it. Whatever, you're going to get health care no matter how much you biatch and whine about it so take the congrats and shut up.

qorkfiend:Aikidogamer: I find it interesting that sever-ability is now infered to be a part of legislation if it is not there...

It wasn't inferred. The court never reached the point where severability was an issue, because the mandate had enough votes to be upheld.

I realize that, but other comments in the reading when I was listening in the radio indicated that had it become an issue, that is what the court would have done because he said we are in the business of ensuring laws are constitutional, not dismantling them or something to that effect.

The difference there Jethro is those laws did not take a chunk of change out of the average persons wallet. This will.

No, it won't, actually - and anyway, a lot of things take a chunk of change out of my pocket.Like fighter planes that won't fly in the rain. And invasions of countries that haven't done anything to America. And rooting up pot farms. And cops and courts and jails.Keep dreaming, if you must, that this horseshiat "tax" issue is going to be your "Obama killer". It isn't.

brobdiggy:It amazes me that so many of you think this is a great thing. It's just the government getting its foot in the door to have even greater power.

1. Government makes everyone have health care, and starts to pay for many more people's health care.2. Government realizes this actually will increase the cost of health care. Needs to reign in costs.3. Government tells people "We pay for your health care, so we can dictate your health".4. Government bans Cheetos, DQ Blizzards, and King Size Candy Bars.

// this has already started with the large soda bans.// so much for freedom of choice.

It's understandable that if I am driving my car without insurance I may be pulled over and penalized for it because I am using my car and reaping privileges that I am essentially not fully covered for by law. It makes sense.

My question is this- If I am NOT getting regular medical care, hence never going to the doctor at all for anything, am I going to be essentially 'pulled over and penalized' for something I am not even doing?

I can see that if I WAS going to the doctor and receiving treatment but not paying for the overall insurance or just the basic cost of medicine, THEN I would be penalized for it, but a lot of people have never been to the doctor. Some people NEVER go. They just die. It happens.

IS THIS the equivalent of having to pay for car insurance simply because a majority of people own cars even if I don't have one?

Am I wrong in my understanding of what this Patient Protection Act is all about?

Lets not forget that with more of us on, the cost should drop. In other words we all are in a great big group plan. They forgot this in MA when Romney was just taking care of the big cats.

To me its like we have to pay for education, even if we don't have kids ourselves. The whole model of how we insure people here needs to change.

I am glad those d-bag republicans get it shoved back in the face... pick which of their two faces you want.... I fear tough that they will just go on a say NO to everything orgy from this point on. Party over country first, you know.

SandMann:So, any doctors thinking about moving their practices to another country? If so, which one? Early retirement? Career change?

The smart ones (me) have long ago signed up with Kaiser Permanente, where I don't get paid to do things to people. Instead, it's in the best interest of the company to keep people healthy with prevention. An apple costs less than an angioplasty, and patients like that approach as well.

(And, before the "rationing" argument starts: saving by scrimping turns into some pretty damned expensive outcomes and lawsuits, so it's against our better interests to not just do the right thing the first time. Less work that way, too.)

But those guys still in private practice with "fee-for-service" medical care? They're the ones driving up costs, riding their dinosaur for as long as they can. They're the ones panicking about this.

Pincy:SandMann: So, any doctors thinking about moving their practices to another country? If so, which one? Early retirement? Career change?

Why would doctors be upset by this? It gives them access to more patients because more people will be able to go to the doctor now.

My wife is a dentist and pretty happy about this because pediatric dental is considered an essential benefit. That means all kids just became regular customers. Even if they government is only paying at cost, it's a benefit for her in terms of keeping the office busy. Also much better than the kids only coming in when the have a serious issue or as part of a charity thing.

/it's tough to get the lower income kids since their parents are resistant to the idea of taking charity to support the kids//now though she'll tell the parents they're paying for it, so they might as well make use of it and that will get them through the door.